JimGant

Under the DTA between the US and Thailand, the US has primary taxing authority (but not exclusive) on rental income from properties in the US. Thailand could also tax it, but would have to give a credit for all the tax paid to the US, which probably means little or no tax paid to Thailand. So, assuming you don't get an LTR visa, or the LTR tax exemption falls through -- worst case would probably be the paperwork drill of maybe having to file a Thai tax return. From the technical explanation of Article 6 (Rents) of the Thai-US DTA.

I submitted three 1099's -- Air Force, Social Security, and RMD from my Schwab IRA. Submitted a summary page explaining and totalizing. Also submitted the related Form 1040, but as this was a joint return, the consolidated numbers are worthless without the 1099 breakouts. Also submitted current year's projected pay, based on pay stubs, plus proof of already taken RMD. Guess this satisfied BOI, as I didn't receive any requests for further information.

Use a collared shirt for your photo too. As I recall, someone was denied his photo submission because he was wearing a tee shirt. Handy with Photoshop -- dress yourself up in a coat and tie.

The only tax rates mentioned in the DTAs are those 10 and 15% figures applicable to interest and dividends. For other income, like pensions, you pay full fare taxation to the country doing the taxing.

I must of missed that bulletin. Originally, only in person or via an agent was acceptable. Then, I believe, by mail was allowed. So, now, online?

I'd put all my money on BoI. The LTR visas are their pet project, and if they've promised LTR visa holders that their foreign income won't be taxed, they'll certainly have higher horse power to back up that contract should RD pull a fast one. Why? Do a Google and note who they work for: Office of the Prime Minister. BoI has bigger fish to fry, with talk about not parsing out income from remittances and just taxing the whole cash flow. That ain't going to happen, as by taxing capital inflows, Foreign Direct Investment would die -- and FDI is BoI's main reason for existence. Thus, the only logical way of taxing just income is to -- just tax income as in occurs abroad, whether remitted or not. So, if your future holds sending a pile of capital to Thailand to buy a condo, I wouldn't worry too much that that will have any tax implications. IMO.

The speaker, Thomas Carden, has many mistakes in his repertoire. Six years ago on this forum, we discussed his too-good-to-be-true product that would allow US taxpayers who lived in Thailand for over 180 days to avoid all taxation (Thai and US) on their IRA distributions. His rationale: The "saving clause" in the US-Thai DTA does not apply to private pensions, including IRA's. This would make Thailand the only country in the world, then, where you could move to and cash out your IRAs tax free, to include exception from US taxes. Yeah, right. Anyway, the below thread ref is long and probably of interest primarily to US types, especially those now living over 180 days in Thailand and are paying taxes on their US IRA distributions. But, it does give perspective on Carden's dubious standards. https://aseannow.com/topic/1008555-tax-specialist-in-chiang-mai/page/3/ Pay particular attention to the Swiss-US DTA and its IRA treatment -- and how it's been vetted by the Senior Technical Reviewer in the Office of Chief Counsel, IRS. No such vetting has been done with the US-Thai DTA in regards to IRAs, and those tax returns filed by Carden, exempting IRAs from taxation, if audited, have only had low level auditors completely overwhelmed with treaty language, tax code language, and Carden's snake oil interpretation of the saving clause. So, yeah, if you hire Carden, you can save a bundle on your taxes, including filing amended tax returns for the previous three years. And probably with little risk. I just don't like the unethical.

Oh, BS. That's what DTAs are all about, defining which contracting state has exclusive taxing authority; no taxing authority; or partial authority (and credits involved, if both countries should tax). My govt pension, due to DTAs, is not taxable by any European country in which I might reside -- so what's this "sole tax sovereignty" of European countries all about? Do your homework.

Right now the Visa rate and Wise rates for dollar to baht exchange are the same: 35.45 (MC is probably about the same, as it usually is). This has always been an attractive feature of using my fee free US credit card -- the Visa Fx rate approximates the interbank exchange rate, similar to Wise. So, I can enjoy the full exchange rate, like 35.45 -- and get a 2% cash reward in addition. And, if I used my fee free Schwab debit/ATM card in a Thai ATM, I'd also realize the 35.45 rate. If I sent $1000 via Wise, after their fees, I'd get an effective exchange rate of 35.14 (slightly better for $10000, at 35.18). Don't know what the over the counter fees are today, if any. Obviously, if no fees, this would beat Wise for getting cash into your hand.

Well, I reported this earlier, in more detail, but here's a ruling on the latest US income tax model (2006) for DTAs. Whether such language applies to all/most DTAs is questionable, but there's a large commonality amongst DTAs, largely due to most countries following the Model language from the OECD and UN DTA boilerplate. Now, if your DTA had this language, but Thailand decided to ignore it -- well, that's a whole different question. But it's doubtful Thailand would want to torpedo DTAs, as they seem to be, overall, in Thailand's favor.

Or, I guess, your wife's death certificate. Which leads me to say: I believe your marriage extension is good until expiration date after your wife's death. Not sure how that works for divorce.....(?).

How does this "...may be..." work out in real life? Do representatives of the UK and Thailand throw dice every year to decide which country gets to tax this type of income for that year? Here's some information from the Technical Explanation of the US-Thai DTA: The first paragraph of Article 6 states the general rule that income of a resident of a Contracting State derived from real property situated in the other Contracting State may be taxed in the Contracting State in which the property is situated. . This Article does not grant an exclusive taxing right to the situs State; the situs State is merely given the primary right to tax. Taxing rights granted by the agreements will be either primary or subsidiary. Primary rights give an unrestricted right to tax the property in question; subsidiary rights allow taxation, but only after giving credit for the tax on the property in the other country. Presumably such explanation would apply to UK DTAs, as they adhere basically to either the OECD Model or UN Model tax treaties, as do US DTAs. Thus, the UK has primary taxation rights on rental income. Thailand, however, can also tax this income (if remitted to Thailand), but must give a credit for the taxes paid to the UK. So, if Thai taxation has a higher effective tax rate on this rental income than that of the UK, then your total tax bill will be both the UK taxes and the Thai taxes that exceed the tax credit for the UK taxes. Thus, when you see may be taxed, and both countries decide to tax subject income, then your tax bill will equate to whichever country's effective tax rate is higher.

And, of course, you believe the election was stolen---. Well, you were almost right, except true patriots discovered the Maga Republican's phony electors scheme. Gawd, what happened to the rational America I grew up in.....?

How applied differently? If both Thais and farangs are being honest in their assessable income declarations, the same deductions and allowances apply -- and the same taxes owed. You're saying Thais will be able to cheat, but no so farangs?

Interesting. For taking a Thai tax credit on my US tax return, no supporting documentation is required. So far, I've only taken a credit for taxes withheld on my Bangkok Bank savings account. As this has been below $600, I only need to plug in the figure I arrived at on a single line on the tax return. Maybe in the future, if the new rules mean I have to declare my IRA payment on a Thai tax return, per DTA -- then if this is above $600, I'll need to fill out a Form 1116. Again, no Thai supporting paperwork required -- and a straightforward process, especially if using TurboTax. I know you Old World folks get tired of hearing this -- but if Thailand's new rules require me to declare my IRA payment, there will be no additional cost to me, as Thailand gets to keep my taxes to fix pot holes, and the US loses the equivalent in taxes, due to tax credits. Finally, fairness: I now pay to fix a pot hole in Doi Saket, and no longer pay to fix a pot hole in East Jesus, Iowa. Yawn.

Huh? The DTAs with Thailand already give Thailand the right to tax certain foreign income belonging to foreign tax residents of Thailand (like, as a Yank, my IRA payout or my pension from Boeing, etc). Only because of their "remittance" requirement -- a domestic law, with no relationship to any DTA language -- to include "exempt if brought in in a later calendar year" have foreigners (along with Thai fat cats) been allowed to avoid Thai income tax. Now, they're wising up, modifying their domestic remittance law to allow them to take full advantage of the DTA language giving them priority, or even exclusive taxation rights on certain foreign income belonging to tax resident foreign expats. Don't blame them for finally using the DTA agreement they signed to finally collect some tax on foreign income, that had been denied due to a stupid domestic law regarding "remittance." Yes, the stupid remittance law will still be in place, which will still allow some, or maybe all, income from an expat to avoid taxation (if he doesn't need to bring that income into Thailand, ever). And the reason it will still be in place is because Thai fat cats still need it to shelter foreign income, which now, instead of being remitted in the following year, will stay abroad in Swiss ski chalet property, or used to buy yachts and private jets, to finally end up in Thailand for resale. Hey, Thailand, if you really want to fatten your coffer, do away with the remittance requirement and just tax foreign income -- like the rest of the civilized world does. Much harder for the fat cats to duck this. Anyway, to somehow think the new proposed rule violates any language in any DTA is ridiculous. To the contrary -- just shows Thailand can finally make money by using the language of all those DTAs to its advantage.

No, not if you peruse the Technical Explanation for US Model tax treaties -- and the US-Thai treaty used the US Model (albeit the 1996 version): Roth IRAs are only used as an example -- read the whole link to see how, even non-deductible contributions to a normal IRA, would be tax exempt in the resident country. Granted, other non-US related tax treaties probably use one of the other two Models: OECD and UN. But, all Models are almost 95% identical, using common sense -- and differing primarily in emphasis. Anyway, common sense, to me at least, that tax exempt pensions brought into Thailand would be treated as tax exempt by the Thais -- if for no other reason than under the Non-Discrimination clause of most tax treaties. Getting real repetitive around here with facts and nonsense, but since I mentioned common sense, here's what it looks like to me in the future: 1. No way can they label all monies remitted to Thailand as income. That doesn't even need any more elaboration. AND, the idea of a remittance tax is even more ludicrous -- and an end to FDI. 2. Since they can't parse what part of a remittance is income, they'll have to rely on self-declaration. Hey, the banks can't tell what part of a remittance is income, and even with FATCA and CRS income reporting info, if their info on your income doesn't match your remittances, which it won't, now what?. Anyway, forget some goat f..... of 10,000 RD clerks massaging non conclusive data. But, expect a higher incident of random audits, to test how self compliance is doing -- I could live with that. 3. Self compliance with me would have me only remitting monies to Thailand from a separate bank account containing my Air Force pension and Social Security funds -- both exclusively tax exempt in Thailand. Thus, no assessable income for Thai taxes, thus no need to file a Thai tax return. Yes, should I need to remit a large chunk for some reason, I could go to the account containing the inheritance from my mom (non income, of course). Again, this would all be self compliance, and would dictate I had no need to file a Thai tax return, and if audited, completely supportable. Anyway, stay tuned. But I can't imagine -- if logic dictates -- that things would be much different from what I surmise. Of course, they might -- including my ace-in-the-hole LTR visa. We live in exciting times. Yawn.

Yes.

Sounds like it. And it seems Canada has exclusive taxation rights on both govt and private pensions -- unlike your southern cousins, where only govt pensions are exclusively the privilege of the IRS, not Thailand.

Not exactly. The following quote is from the Technical Explanation for the Thai-US DTA. The second sentence is from another source, but gives further clarity: Makes sense. If both contracting countries have taxing rights on the same income, one country has to have "first dibs," i.e., have primary taxing authority. You can't flip a coin to see which country gets to keep all its taxation, while the other country only gets to keep the taxation in excess of the subtracted-out credits -- if there is any left. Thus, if you have rental property in the UK (or US, wherever), the UK gets "first dibs" on taxation -- and on keeping all that taxation. Thailand can, if it wants, also tax this rental income (if remitted to Thailand, currently in same year). But it has to back out a credit for the UK taxes paid -- which probably means there's nothing left. Now, if a country has exclusive taxation rights -- that's exactly what it says: The second country has no taxation rights, even if the country with exclusive taxation rights chooses not to exercise those rights.... ... unless you're America, which has the "saving clause" in all its DTAs. This clause trumps the DTA's exclusivity clauses (with a few exceptions), allowing the US to tax all worldwide income, regardless of what the DTA says. Thus, if Thailand doesn't want to tax my IRA (or can't, because of their domestic law about remitting in the next calendar year), then Uncle Sam says, ok, we'll make sure this bugger pays taxes somewhere -- thanx, Thailand. (If Thailand does tax my IRA -- and maybe they'll start next year -- double taxation is avoided, with the US giving a tax credit for those taxes paid to Thailand. This would be a situation of Thailand having "first dibs.") How do you think the US pays for all those wars..........

Could you show us what the label looks like? Thanx.

You can treat the 15% as 'withhold at source/final payment.' Thus, not reportable on your Thai tax return. Obviously, if you're in a higher tax bracket than 15%, this would be to your advantage.

Labelled by whom? If you send a Wise transfer, you're saying it's labelled as income? Makes no sense -- how would anybody in Thailand know it's income, if sent from one of your financial institution's accounts? Only if it's a direct deposit from, say, a pension payment -- would it have the flavor of income. But even here, it may not be income for Thai tax purposes (think: exempt due to DTA). So, labeling it "income" serves no purpose as far as the RD is concerned. And, labeling all incoming remittances as "income" would push all FDI to other countries. So, no, they're not going to label all remittances as income (which, if the obvious escaped you, would include FDI's) So logic and logistical common sense would dictate they're restricted to: PIT collection depends on taxpayers' faithful and full declaration of income in their PIT returns. Yes, sample audits for compliance may occur in larger numbers. And, FATCA and CRS reporting may increase the spotlight on compliance. But for Americans, nothing changes, since we're already taxed on our worldwide income. Possibly Thai RD may fine tune the DTA, and figure out that Thailand (per DTA) had "primary tax authority" on my IRA payout. Ok, then this is where "faithful and full declaration" comes in, and I need to file a Thai tax return, declaring my IRA payout as assessable income for Thai tax purposes. Then, I take this tax payment as a credit against my US taxes -- and break even in my overall tax payment situation (note: for high five figure income, Thai tax MAY BE higher than US, and the difference has to be eaten -- not a huge number, however). So, fellow Yanks. Go watch the NFL, and let the others worry about, hey, there may be taxes in their future.

This from a few pages back; it's from a technical explanation of a US DTA, but most DTAs are similar, being based on the OECD Model: